In this context, the efficacy of few newer insecticides viz., flubediamide, chlorantriniliprole, emamectin benzoate, fipronil, imidacloprid, spinosad and neem oil etc., were evaluated under field condition for their comparative efficacy against diamondback moth on cauliflower.
Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2017) 6(5): 1958-1963 International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences ISSN: 2319-7706 Volume Number (2017) pp 1958-1963 Journal homepage: http://www.ijcmas.com Original Research Article https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2017.605.218 Efficacy of Some New Insecticides against Diamond Back Moth (Plutella xylostella L.) on Cauliflower S.K Dotasara1*, N Agrawal1, N Singh2 and Dinesh Swami3 Department of Entomology, CSAUA & T, Kanpur-208002, India Division of Entomology, RARI, SKNAU, Jobner, India Department of Entomology, SKNAU, Jobner-303329, India *Corresponding author ABSTRACT Keywords Plutella xylostella, Cauliflower, Diamond Back Moth insecticides Article Info Accepted: 19 April 2017 Available Online: 10 May 2017 The efficacy of different insecticides against the diamondback moth (DBM) on cauliflower was studied at CSAUA&T, Kanpur Among the various insecticides evaluated against the DBM, spinosad (45 SC @ 0.5ml/ litre) treated cauliflower plot showed highest per cent reduction over control (89.97%) with less number of larvae (0.58 larvae/ plant) The larval count and per cent reduction over control in the different treated plots ranged from 0.58 to 3.94 and 89.97 to 41.37 respectively as against 8.79 numbers of larvae in untreated control Flubendiamide 48 SC @ 0.3 ml/ litre and chlorantriniliprole 18.5 SC @ 0.3 g/ litre were next effective pesticides to reduce the pest incidence significantly All the treatments were also observed to be significantly superior over control Introduction Diamond back moth, Plutella xylostella L (Plutellidae: Lepidoptera) is the most important pest causing severe yield loss to cauliflower every year The damage caused by diamond back moth, P xylostella L has been estimated globally to cost US$ billion in direct losses and control costs (Grzywacz et al., 2010) The use of synthetic insecticides is the main control strategy (Kibata, 1996) This pest has developed resistance against all major groups of pesticides, including Bacillus thuringiensis bacterial based bio-pesticides (Tabashnik et al., 1990; Zhou et al., 2011) In India, Krishnamoorthy (2004) reported that 52% yield loss on cauliflower due to diamond back moth Farmers are compelled to use chemical insecticides in order to cultivate lucratively, as traditional and cultural practices alone cannot give satisfactory control over the pest menace Frequent use of chemical insecticides at higher doses results in development of insecticide resistance in P xylostella against a range of insecticides in different parts of India (Talekar et al., 1990 and Vastrad et al., 2003) This has necessitated the use of alternative eco-friendly insecticides to sustain the management of diamondback moth and the development of resistance against these traditional insecticides can be easily breakdown by using the newer group of molecules 1958 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2017) 6(5): 1958-1963 In this context, the efficacy of few newer insecticides viz., flubediamide, chlorantriniliprole, emamectin benzoate, fipronil, imidacloprid, spinosad and neem oil etc., were evaluated under field condition for their comparative efficacy against diamondback moth on cauliflower Materials and Methods A field experiment on cauliflower var Pusa Snowball-16 was laid out during Rabi season 2014-15 at Student Instructional Farm in Chandra Shekhar Azad University of Agriculture and Technology, Kanpur (U.P.) India, in Randomised Block Design (RBD) with eight treatments including untreated control each replicated thrice Each treatment schedule comprised two sprays, except treatment No which was taken as untreated control The present study was carried out to evaluate the efficacy of newer insecticides against diamond back moth, (P xylostella Linn.) of cauliflower Required numbers of plots having a size of 3m X 3m were prepared to accommodate all the treatments, each having replications Along with two main irrigation channels of 1m width at the two length sides of the experimental field, two sub-irrigation channels 1.0m were provided in between replications and each plot was separated by a trench of 0.5m so that drifting of different insecticides during spraying was minimized First spraying was applied after 75 days of transplanting followed by second spraying at 15 days interval The percentage of reduction in insect pest population was calculated on the basis of pre and post treatment count after and 15 days of each spraying To estimate the larval population of diamondback moth, direct visual counting method was used (Lal, 1998) The mean number of DBM larval population were recorded from randomly selected plants in each plot and same expressed as numbers of larval population /plant during morning hours between 6:30 a.m to 8.00 a.m when most of the insect species are less active The observations on DBM population were recorded at weekly intervals to monitor the ETL of the pest and to decide the time of application of insecticides Pre-treatment counts of DBM larvae were taken one day prior in all the plots at each time just before the application of insecticides Post-treatment counts of DBM larvae were taken after 7th and 15th days of application of treatments Similar observations were also taken after 2nd applications of treatments The formula used for the calculation of percentage reduction of pest population over control using following formula giving by Henderson and Tilton (1955) referring it to be modification of Abbott (1925) Ta Cb Per cent efficacy = (1 - ————— x—————) x 100 Ca Tb Where, Ta = Number of insects on treated plots after insecticidal application Tb = Number of insects in treated plots before insecticidal application Ca = Number of insects in untreated plots after insecticidal application Cb = Number of insects in untreated plots before insecticidal application The data on percentage reduction of DBM population were transformed into angular values (Bliss, 1937) and natural enemies in to (Gomez and Gomez, 1976) and subjected to analysis of variance Results and Discussion The perusal of Table reveals that larval population of DBM was statistically uniform varying from 6.26 to 7.56 larvae per plant in all plots before application of insecticides 1959 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2017) 6(5): 1958-1963 Table.1 Efficacy of newer insecticides against Plutella xylostella Linn., infesting on cauliflower during Rabi, 2014-15 No of DBM larvae / Plant First spray S.N Treatment Dose DBS DAS 1.0 ml/l 0.3 g/l 0.3 ml/l 0.2 g/l 2.0 ml/l 0.2 g/l 0.5 ml/l 4.17 (2.16) 0.93 (1.20) 0.97 (1.21) 1.50 (1.41) 2.23 (1.65) 4.53 (2.24) 0.73 (1.11) 7.87 (2.89) 0.026 0.079 Neem oil 2% Imidacloprid 17.8 SL Spinosad 45 SC Untreated control - SE (m) ± - 6.67 (2.68)* 6.26 (2.60) 7.15 (2.77) 7.56 (2.84) 6.77 (2.70) 6.53 (2.65) 7.33 (2.80) 6.83 (2.71) 0.017 CD (P=0.05) - 0.053 Fipronil SC Chlorantriniliprole 18.5 SC Flubendiamide 48 SC Emamectin benzoate SG DBS - Days before spray, DAS -Days after spray, % Reduction over control 45.76 87.07 88.26 82.77 71.36 39.78 91.32 figures in parentheses Second spray 15 DAS 4.83 (2.31) 1.37 (1.37) 1.47 (1.40) 2.23 (1.65) 3.07 (1.89) 4.97 (2.34) 1.33 (1.35) 8.43 (2.99) 0.055 % Reduction over control 41.26 82.32 83.37 76.05 63.28 38.41 85.27 0.169 DAS 3.07 (1.89) 0.23 (0.86) 0.20 (0.84) 0.43 (0.97) 0.87 (1.17) 3.30 (1.95) 0.15 (0.81) 9.63 (3.18) 0.050 0.154 transformed values 1960 % Reduction over control 44.46 85.05 88.06 83.01 75.26 41.84 90.15 15 DAS 2.50 (1.73) 0.18 (0.83) 0.15 (0.81) 0.37 (0.93) 0.77 (1.13) 2.97 (1.86) 0.10 (0.77) 9.23 (3.12) 0.041 0.126 % Reduction over control 52.76 87.75 90.66 85.01 77.17 45.45 93.15 Average larval count 3.64 (2.02) 0.68 (1.06) 0.70 (1.06) 1.13 (1.24) 1.74 (1.46) 3.94 (2.10) 0.58 (1.01) 8.79 (3.04) Average % Reductio n over control 46.06 85.55 87.59 81.71 71.77 41.37 89.97 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2017) 6(5): 1958-1963 The larval population was significantly decreased in all treated plots after application in comparison to untreated control Spinosad 45 SC @ 0.5ml/ litre had its superiority and it recorded 0.58 larvae per plant and provided 89.97 per cent reduction in larval population over untreated control Flubendiamide 48 SC @ 0.3 ml/ litre was statistically at par with chlorantriniliprole 18.5 SC @ 0.3 g/litre with 0.70 and 0.68 larvae per plant and they provided 87.59 and 85.55 per cent reduction in population over untreated control, respectively Effectiveness of emamectin benzoate SG @ 0.2 g/ litre and neem oil 2% @ 2.0 ml/ litre was 81.71 and 71.77 per cent reduction over untreated control with 1.13 and 1.74 larvae of DBM The efficacy of fipronil SC @ 1.0 ml/ litre and imidacloprid 17.8 SL @ 0.2 g/ litre highly toxic followed by was significantly poor but they were superior over untreated control against DBM (Table-1) After 15 days of the first spray of treatments, the data revealed that all the treatments were superior over untreated control Spinosad 45 SC @ 0.5ml/ litre had its superiority and provided 85.27 per cent reduction in larval population over untreated control Flubendiamide 48 SC @ 0.3 ml/ litre was statistically at par with chlorantriniliprole 18.5 SC @ 0.3 g/ litre recording 83.37 and 82.32 per cent reduction in larval population over untreated control, while emamectin benzoate SG @ 0.2 g/ litre was also effective with 76.05 per cent reduction in larval population over untreated control The performance of fipronil SC @ 1.0 ml/ litre and imidacloprid 17.8 SL @ 0.2 g/ litre was significantly poor but better than untreated control The results (Table-1) revealed that reduction in DBM population in all the treatments was noticed; spinosad 45 SC @ 0.5 ml/ litre highly toxic followed by flubendiamide 48 SC @ 0.3 ml/ litre The remaining new chemicals, chlorantriniliprole 18.5 SC @ 0.3 g/ litre, emamectin benzoate SG @ 0.2 g/ litre, neem oil 2% @ 2.0 ml/litre, fipronil SC @ 1.0 ml/ litre and imidacloprid 17.8 SL @ 0.2 g/ litre were moderately toxic Imidacloprid 17.8 SL @ 0.2 g/ litre was found least in controlling DBM The present studies revealed that spinosad, flubendiamide, chlorantriniliprole and emamectin benzoate were effective in managing diamond back moth in cauliflower Our results, suggest that spinosad was most effective insecticide in both sprays Our findings are supported by Mandal et al., (2009) who reported the superiority of spinosad (Spinotor 45SC; 0.4 ml/L) against diamond back moth, P xylostella Dhawan et al., (2009) evaluated chlorantraniliprole @ 30 g a.i./ which was the most effective treatment for the control of bollworm complex on cotton Deshmukh et al., (2010) also revealed that flubendiamide 0.007%, spinosad 0.009% and emamectin benzoate 0.0015% were most effective in reducing the Helicoverpa armigera population and pod damage in chickpea Venkateswarlu et al., (2011) also showed that Chlorantraniliprole (18.5% SC @ 10 g a.i./ ha) had highest PROC of diamond back moth, Plutella xylostella (83.65% and 82.08%) Shankara Murthy and Sannaveerappanavar (2013) also reported that the new molecules, flubendiamide, spinosad and emamectin benzoate were highly toxic to the susceptible DBM strain Nikam et al., (2014) also reported effectiveness of spinosad against this pest, who observed the better efficacy of spinosad against DBM Lal and Meena (2001) also reported similar result which shows that besides imidacloprid other insecticides were found less effective against diamond back moth Acknowledgement The authors are thankful to The Head, Department of Entomology, Chandra Shekhar 1961 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2017) 6(5): 1958-1963 Azad University of Agriculture and Technology, Kanpur (U.P.) for providing facilities to conduct the experiments References Abbott, W.S 1925 A method of computing the effectiveness of an insecticide J Eco Entomol., 18: 265-267 Anonymous 2014 Indian Horticulture Database, National Horticulture Board, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, 85, Institutional Area, Sector-18, Gurgaon-122015, India, pp 144-151 Bliss, C.I 1937 Angles corresponding to percentage Plant Protection, No 12, Leningrad Deshmukh, S.G., Sureja, B.V., Jethva, D.M and Chatar, V.P 2010 Field efficacy of different insecticides against Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) infesting chickpea Legume Res., 33(4): 269-273 Dhawan, A.K., Singh, R., Singh, K., and Sharma, M 2009 Efficacy of chlorantraniliprole against bollworm complex on cotton J Insect Sci., (Ludhiana), 22(3): 248-253 Gomez, K.A and Gomez, A.A 1976 Problem data: Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research (II ed.) John Wiley and Sons, New York, pp 272315 Grzywacz, D., Rossbach, A., Rauf, A., Russel, D.A., Srinivasan, R and Shelton, A.M 2010 Current control methods for diamondback moth and other brassica insect pests and the prospects for improved management with lepidopteran – resistant Bt vegetable brassicas in Asia and Africa Crop Prot., 29: 68-79 Henderson, C.F and Tilton, E.W 1955 Tests with acaricides against brown wheat mite J Economic Entomol., 48(2): 157161 Kibata, G.N 1996 Diamondback moth Plutella xylostella L (Lepidoptera: Yponomeutidae), a problem pest of brassicae crops in Kenya Proc First Biennial Crop Protection Conf., 27-28 March, Nairobi, Kenya: 1-11 Krishnamoorthy, A 2004 Biological control of diamondback moth Plutella xylostella (L.), an Indian scenario with reference to past and future strategies In Proceedings of the International Symposium (Eds AA Kirk D Bordat), 21 -24 October 2002, Montpellier, France, CIRAD, pp 204-11 Lal, O.P 1998 Notes summer school on ―Advance Technologies in Important Vegetable Crops, including Cole Crops‖ May 4-24, I.A.R.I New Delhi, pp 63-66 Lal, O.P and Meena, R.K 2001 Effects of certain insecticides against diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella (L.) on cabbage under field condition Pesticide Res J., 13(2): 242-246 Mandal, S.K., Kumar, R., Das, S and Kumar, V 2009 Field evaluation of some newer insecticides against the diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella (L.), on cauliflower Pest Management and Economic Zool., 17(1):105-108 Nikam, T.A., Chandele, A.G., Gade, R.S and Gaikwad, S.M 2014 Efficacy of chemical insecticides against diamond back moth, Plutella xylostella L on cabbage under field condition Trends in Biosci., 7(12): 1196-1199 Shankara Murthy, M and Sannaveerappanavar, V.T 2013 Baseline values for susceptibility of Plutella xylostella L (Plutellidae: Lepidoptera) to new insecticides J Ent Res., 37(4): 293-296 Tabashnik, B.E., Cushing, N.L., Finson, N and Johnson, M.W 1990 Field development of resistance to Bacillus thuringiensis in Diamondback moth (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae) J Econ 1962 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2017) 6(5): 1958-1963 Entomol., 83: 1671-1676 Talekar, N.S., Yang, J.C and Lee, S.T 1990 Annotated Bibliography of Diamondback moth, vol., Asian Vegetable Research and Development Centre, Taiwan pp.199 Vastrad, A.S., Lingappa, S and Basavanagoud, K 2003 Management of insecticide resistant populations of diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella (L.) (Yponomeutidae: Lepidoptera) Pest management in Horticultural Ecosystem, 9(1): 33-40 Venkateswarlu, V., Sharma, R.K and Sharma, K 2011 Evalutation of ecofriendly insecticides against major insect pests of cabbage Pesticide Res J., 23(2): 172-180 Zhou, L., Huang, J., Xu, H 2011 Monitoring resistance of field populations of diamondback moth Plutella xylostella L (Lepidoptera: Yponomeutidae) to five insecticides in South China: A tenyear case study Crop Prot., 30: 272278 How to cite this article: Dotasara, S.K., N Agrawal, N Singh and Dinesh Swami 2017 Efficacy of Some New Insecticides against Diamond Back Moth (Plutella xylostella L.) on Cauliflower Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci 6(5): 1958-1963 doi: https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2017.605.218 1963 ... S and Kumar, V 2009 Field evaluation of some newer insecticides against the diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella (L.), on cauliflower Pest Management and Economic Zool., 17(1):105-108 Nikam,... Dotasara, S.K., N Agrawal, N Singh and Dinesh Swami 2017 Efficacy of Some New Insecticides against Diamond Back Moth (Plutella xylostella L.) on Cauliflower Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci 6(5): 1958-1963... untreated control The present study was carried out to evaluate the efficacy of newer insecticides against diamond back moth, (P xylostella Linn.) of cauliflower Required numbers of plots having